Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Sumit Rajput vs State Of U P And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|29 January, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 78
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1414 of 2021 Applicant :- Sumit Rajput Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Saxena Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Anil Kumar-IX,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicant to quash the entire proceeding of criminal Case No. nil of 2020 (State Versus Sumit Rajpur) and cognizance order, arising out of charge sheet No. 01 of 2019, dated 16.12.2019 in Case Crime No. 0319 of 2019, under Section 420 I.P.C. 15(2), 15(3) of Indian Medical Act 1956, Police Station- Kamalganj, District- Farrukhabad, pending in the court of Learned court below, Farrukhabad.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment. Charge sheet has been filed on the basis of insufficient evidence.
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the matter of the case, at this stage at cannot be said that no offense is made out against the applicant.
All the submission relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.There is no sufficient ground to quash the charge sheet in the aforesaid case.
The prayer for quashing the charge sheet and cognizance order in the aforesaid case is hereby refused.
At this stage, learned counsel for applicant prays that a direction may be issued to the court below for expeditious disposal of the bail application of the applicant.
Learned A.G.A. has no objection regarding expeditious disposal of bail application.
In view of the submission made by learned counsel for parties and considering the facts of the case, it is provided that if applicant appears and moves his bail application before the court below concerned within 30 days from today, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.
For a period of 30 days from today or till the surrender of the applicant before the court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case. However, in case, the applicant does not appears before the court below within the aforesaid period, the trial court will be at liberty to take coercive action against the applicant in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid observation, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 29.1.2021 Sachin
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sumit Rajput vs State Of U P And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
29 January, 2021
Judges
  • Anil Kumar Ix
Advocates
  • Prashant Saxena